Broken Games

[Damian Magecraft]

Interesting query for you...
The premise-
A GM introduces an item (object, location, whatever) to the setting and the PCs discover an exploit in that item that would break the setting and then utilize it to do just that.
My question is-
Who is at fault?
The GM for failing to anticipate the exploit?
Or
The players for utilizing the exploit?

[palladiumjunkie]

Interesting query for you...
The premise-
A GM introduces an item (object, location, whatever) to the setting and the PCs discover an exploit in that item that would break the setting and then utilize it to do just that.
My question is-
Who is at fault?
The GM for failing to anticipate the exploit?
Or
The players for utilizing the exploit?

This belongs in the Board index » Just For Fun » Other Games forum.

-Chris

[Damian Magecraft]

Interesting query for you...
The premise-
A GM introduces an item (object, location, whatever) to the setting and the PCs discover an exploit in that item that would break the setting and then utilize it to do just that.
My question is-
Who is at fault?
The GM for failing to anticipate the exploit?
Or
The players for utilizing the exploit?

This belongs in the Board index » Just For Fun » Other Games forum.

-Chris

Why? it is just as relevant here as there...

[palladiumjunkie]

Interesting query for you...
The premise-
A GM introduces an item (object, location, whatever) to the setting and the PCs discover an exploit in that item that would break the setting and then utilize it to do just that.
My question is-
Who is at fault?
The GM for failing to anticipate the exploit?
Or
The players for utilizing the exploit?

This belongs in the Board index » Just For Fun » Other Games forum.

-Chris

Why? it is just as relevant here as there...

Organization. But, I suppose I should just keep quiet. I suppose it really is nitpicking, and if the moderators don't care, then I shouldn't either.

-Chris

[Spinachcat]

Both GM and players share responsibility to keep the game fun. If the GM accidently puts in a super item and it throws the game off track, then the super item needs to be tweaked or nuked and the players need to be cool with that. It happens to newbie GMs and that's understandable - especially in a game as convuluted as Rifts.

[Giant2005]

I wouldn't consider it anyone's fault or even an exploit at all.
The players obviously want to do it, otherwise they wouldn't have made that decision.
The GM with his infinite power could put a stop to it at any time, if he doesn't then he has obviously made the decision not to. In my mind inaction when you have the power to make change without cost, is the same as acceptance.
If everyone is okay with the actions being taken, no-one is at fault because nothing has gone wrong.

[The Dark Elf]

Exploits dont have blame attached to them just potential for some excellent role playing moments.

[The Beast]

Interesting query for you...
The premise-
A GM introduces an item (object, location, whatever) to the setting and the PCs discover an exploit in that item that would break the setting and then utilize it to do just that.
My question is-
Who is at fault?
The GM for failing to anticipate the exploit?
Or
The players for utilizing the exploit?

This belongs in the Board index » Just For Fun » Other Games forum.

-Chris

Actually the GM's Forum would be a much better fit...

[Damian Magecraft]

Interesting query for you...
The premise-
A GM introduces an item (object, location, whatever) to the setting and the PCs discover an exploit in that item that would break the setting and then utilize it to do just that.
My question is-
Who is at fault?
The GM for failing to anticipate the exploit?
Or
The players for utilizing the exploit?

This belongs in the Board index » Just For Fun » Other Games forum.

-Chris

Actually the GM's Forum would be a much better fit...

possibly...
but I wanted more than just the opinions of GMs.

[Spinachcat]

But if players had opinions that mattered, they'd be GMs!

I agree with DM. It's interesting to hear from players on this topic.

[Tiree]

If the GM introduces something that the players exploit, it is the fault of the GM. Now it is the Fault of the player to not recognize the exploit, and bring it up to the GM to correct before it is in effect.

I am very much into exploiting rules for my benefit as a player. I'll scavenge through what the GM has house ruled, and what is in fact within the rules to identify a way out of certain situations. It is my duty as a player to do so, because thinking outside of the box makes a more dynamic game. The GM usually rules for that instance, and after the game I work with the GM on correcting the exploit, or make it an official exploit to be used from that point forward.

[jaymz]

If the GM introduces something that the players exploit, it is the fault of the GM. Now it is the Fault of the player to not recognize the exploit, and bring it up to the GM to correct before it is in effect.

I am very much into exploiting rules for my benefit as a player. I'll scavenge through what the GM has house ruled, and what is in fact within the rules to identify a way out of certain situations. It is my duty as a player to do so, because thinking outside of the box makes a more dynamic game. The GM usually rules for that instance, and after the game I work with the GM on correcting the exploit, or make it an official exploit to be used from that point forward.

[glitterboy2098]

both.

the players, because they chose to exploit the item in a way that drastically effects the setting. they had the option of not using the exploit, for the sake of the game, or finding a way to use the exploit in a fashion that was more conductive to preserving the game, but instead they used in ways they should have known would negatively effect the game.

and the GM, for introducing an item without giving extra thought as to how an item could be exploited by the players, and then not devising a solution that could negate or reduce the effect of the exploit on his game. figuring out all the ripples certainly isn't easy, but usually if there is an exploit, and the players find it, it isn't something totally obscure or hard to figure out. and once they players get the exploit, the GM should be able to come up with a means to limit the damage.

[Damian Magecraft]

If the GM introduces something that the players exploit, it is the fault of the GM. Now it is the Fault of the player to not recognize the exploit, and bring it up to the GM to correct before it is in effect.

I am very much into exploiting rules for my benefit as a player. I'll scavenge through what the GM has house ruled, and what is in fact within the rules to identify a way out of certain situations. It is my duty as a player to do so, because thinking outside of the box makes a more dynamic game. The GM usually rules for that instance, and after the game I work with the GM on correcting the exploit, or make it an official exploit to be used from that point forward.

: All too often I see stories of how a game fell apart due to an exploit being utilized. And the players lay the fault at the GMs feet. While the GMs lay the fault at the Players Feet.
I am just curious if others see things as I do.
While I agree that if the GM does not take steps to curtail the abuse when it is made evident; I also feel the players must take their fair share of the blame as well. They spotted the abuse; saw it for what it was but chose to take advantage of it anyway knowing that it would break the game.

[Damian Magecraft]

both.

the players, because they chose to exploit the item in a way that drastically effects the setting. they had the option of not using the exploit, for the sake of the game, or finding a way to use the exploit in a fashion that was more conductive to preserving the game, but instead they used in ways they should have known would negatively effect the game.

and the GM, for introducing an item without giving extra thought as to how an item could be exploited by the players, and then not devising a solution that could negate or reduce the effect of the exploit on his game. figuring out all the ripples certainly isn't easy, but usually if there is an exploit, and the players find it, it isn't something totally obscure or hard to figure out. and once they players get the exploit, the GM should be able to come up with a means to limit the damage.

good to see I am not alone in that thought process.

[Tiree]

If the GM introduces something that the players exploit, it is the fault of the GM. Now it is the Fault of the player to not recognize the exploit, and bring it up to the GM to correct before it is in effect.

I am very much into exploiting rules for my benefit as a player. I'll scavenge through what the GM has house ruled, and what is in fact within the rules to identify a way out of certain situations. It is my duty as a player to do so, because thinking outside of the box makes a more dynamic game. The GM usually rules for that instance, and after the game I work with the GM on correcting the exploit, or make it an official exploit to be used from that point forward.

: All too often I see stories of how a game fell apart due to an exploit being utilized. And the players lay the fault at the GMs feet. While the GMs lay the fault at the Players Feet.
I am just curious if others see things as I do.
While I agree that if the GM does not take steps to curtail the abuse when it is made evident; I also feel the players must take their fair share of the blame as well. They spotted the abuse; saw it for what it was but chose to take advantage of it anyway knowing that it would break the game.

It is still the fault of the GM for introducing such an item. It is not the Fault of the player for wanting to use such item. Whether or not it is a rule or an item the GM came up with.

What is the fault of the player, is that when such an exploit is evident to the player, and is brought up. They do not follow the GM's wishes on how to rule against the exploit. It is the player's fault if it becomes a hissy fit that they can't do what they wanted.

As a player I have come across many rules, right or wrong that I have exploited to my benefit (or at least tried to). One of the things in doing so, is that if the GM doesn't like such an exploit and kills it. I don't get upset about it, I find something else to do.

[Cinos]

Interesting query for you...
The premise-
A GM introduces an item (object, location, whatever) to the setting and the PCs discover an exploit in that item that would break the setting and then utilize it to do just that.
My question is-
Who is at fault?
The GM for failing to anticipate the exploit?
Or
The players for utilizing the exploit?

Both. Exploits should be thought of before, hand. Players should attempt to be responsible in avoiding them. GM's should patch shown exploits that are too damaging, not by necessarily removing the thing (which can be easy ish for items), but just altering the rule to close the exploit, or removing the item entirely. (Due to that double whammy of options, I feel GM's are generally more at fault for exploits that appear and remain).

[Jorel]

GMs. As they are in control.

[Damian Magecraft]

GMs. As they are in control.

so the players take no blame for violating the social contract? The premise assumes the Players know the exploit will break the game and choose to use it anyway.

[Jorel]

GM should lose the rule breaking thing or the player, either way the GM is in control. That is the premise of the game.

[barna10]

Howdy,

Ulitmately, the GM is to blame, but the players may or may not share in the blame.

First, gmaes are a give and take and one man's exploit is another's bread and butter. I guess some examples from you guys would make things clearer. Are we talking custom items, stuff from the books, a spell, a psionic power, a super power, what?

Now, what I can share are some good and bad experiences I've had with similar situations.

1) In a high-powered Rifts campaign where a few PCs were capable of doing 1000's of MD melee round (Annihilation bullets...don't ask), the rest of us (those without the munchkin weapons) decided to go fight in an arena in Atlantis. The GM didn't tell us what we would fight, just that it was going to be lethal combat and that our reward would be a certain amount of gold and the oppossing force's equipment. Long stroy short, the four of us beat the tar out of his force of 20 mercs. We were excited that we were finally getting some decent stuff! When I pointed out that the gear each of them was equipped with cost around 200 million credits each, the GM renegged on the deal. Suddenly we got to keep one gun, everything else dissappeared! This was just poor GMing; one example of a string of bad GMing. To dangle the prize and then rip it away because he didn't forsee how much he was going to give us was just a pathetic display. Not only was the game a munchkin fest, but then he pretty much said that our 4 PCs were not going to be able to join in the munchkin fest because he wouldn't let us. Ah, the good old days...blah

2) In a Shadowrun game I was running, I orchestrated a "big haul" adventure for the team. All of the players and I were in the Army and 2 of them were ETSing. The idea was to steal some military vehicels, run them to Aztlan, fence them, and retire! So I made the adventure tough, the pay-off worth it, and the ride-off-into-the-sunset scene pretty damn good. Then one of the players starts leafing through a book wanting to buy more cyberware. I ignored him at first, but then he started talking about finding a clinic to get some body work done. I asked him if he realized the campaign was over, and he got pissed and stormed out of the room. He later said I was ruining the game and that I should let him buy the gear. I responded by letting him buy the gear and then telling him to make a new character. (a little off topic, but it makes me chuckle when I think about it)

3) In our current campaign (PF-zombies!) the Players totally nerfed my Zombie-Siege of their village by setting a bunch of bear traps and trapping the Zombies. I had a big battle planned and some damn traps nuked it! I introduced the traps to the fray by making the village a fur-trading post. Technically, they are game breaking as now the PCs will carry some everywhere they go. When they run into zombies they'll just drop the traps and play whack-a-zombie. This has sort of broken the game, who's fault is it? I think it was smart play and no one's "fault". If I was a jerk I could have figured out some idiotic way that the zombies wouldn't get trapped, but instead I took the high-road and rewarded the smart play of the players. Yes, the GMs job will be harder now, but a challenge is not a bad thing!

Now, back on topic, it's all in how you handle it. Even game breaking stuff has it's place. Sometimes it's nice to fluant raw power, but as a norm it gets pretty boring, pretty quick.

[Tiree]

3) In our current campaign (PF-zombies!) the Players totally nerfed my Zombie-Siege of their village by setting a bunch of bear traps and trapping the Zombies. I had a big battle planned and some damn traps nuked it! I introduced the traps to the fray by making the village a fur-trading post. Technically, they are game breaking as now the PCs will carry some everywhere they go. When they run into zombies they'll just drop the traps and play whack-a-zombie. This has sort of broken the game, who's fault is it? I think it was smart play and no one's "fault". If I was a jerk I could have figured out some idiotic way that the zombies wouldn't get trapped, but instead I took the high-road and rewarded the smart play of the players. Yes, the GMs job will be harder now, but a challenge is not a bad thing!

Now, back on topic, it's all in how you handle it. Even game breaking stuff has it's place. Sometimes it's nice to flaunt raw power, but as a norm it gets pretty boring, pretty quick.

This is a great example. I don't know how many times you end up finding a cool find as a player that makes some pretty brutal game play. I had a character who had virtually no money. Ended up with a sling and shot. Due to the mechanics of the game, and her very high strength. She ended up throwing that shot fairly fast, and doing more damage than a machinegun. From that point forward, nearly everyone picked up that little trinket of a weapon. That same game system, we were in a nasty fight. We broke for a week right at the climatic battle. During that time, I scoured everything I could to find some way to defeat the bad guy. Ended up with an obscure rule, and brought it up to the GM. We ran it, and even though it was devastating. It didn't do what I had expected (he ruled differently).

In the Star Wars RCR - I coined an exploit that is book legal: "The Jedi Circle J**k of Healing". This is where you have a group of Jedi, each one healing everyone else, then heal themselves. With enough Jedi and enough downtime, they will be back to full health in a few rounds.

Robotech 1st Ed: The RFL-100 could be used as a machinegun. Even though it only does 1d6MD per round, it literally split a bioroid in half

These are minor exploits, but can be used in brutal fashion.

[Colt47]

Does the GM in this scenario know there is a buggy item and assuming the GM did know about the exploit, did he explain the exploit to the players in his game and ask them not to do so?

Or did the Players discover the exploit on their own and actively choose to exploit it to demonstrate that there is an exploit?

[Damian Magecraft]

Does the GM in this scenario know there is a buggy item and assuming the GM did know about the exploit, did he explain the exploit to the players in his game and ask them not to do so?

Or did the Players discover the exploit on their own and actively choose to exploit it to demonstrate that there is an exploit?

Hmmm.... it does appear I did not make that point clear...
For the purpose of this discussion assume the GM is unaware of the exploit.

[Jorel]

Time to be a better GM. Limit it, upon finding out how devastating it is.

[Noon]

Interesting query for you...
The premise-
A GM introduces an item (object, location, whatever) to the setting and the PCs discover an exploit in that item that would break the setting and then utilize it to do just that.
My question is-
Who is at fault?
The GM for failing to anticipate the exploit?
Or
The players for utilizing the exploit?

It depends on whether #1 the players want to maintain (as opposed to break) the setting, and yet they simply do not consider this an exploit. This means that you're just not on the same wavelength as each other. In one setting, a giant robot is breaking the setting, in another, it's perfectly fine. What 'breaks' is simply a matter of wavelength.

Or #2, the players don't care much for maintaining setting. For alot of people it's not the most thrilling thing in the world.

In either case no ones at fault. Your just not interested in the same things.

[zyanitevp]

both.

the players, because they chose to exploit the item in a way that drastically effects the setting. they had the option of not using the exploit, for the sake of the game, or finding a way to use the exploit in a fashion that was more conductive to preserving the game, but instead they used in ways they should have known would negatively effect the game.

and the GM, for introducing an item without giving extra thought as to how an item could be exploited by the players, and then not devising a solution that could negate or reduce the effect of the exploit on his game. figuring out all the ripples certainly isn't easy, but usually if there is an exploit, and the players find it, it isn't something totally obscure or hard to figure out. and once they players get the exploit, the GM should be able to come up with a means to limit the damage.

Absolutely 100% agree. I play in, and run, 2 separate games. They are both sandbox games where the players have had much input on creating the world, the people, and their characters. Therefore they feel as responsible as the GM if there is an issue, and will bring out any broken parts, OOC, to the GM to repair.

[flatline]

Player characters are meant to be dynamic elements in the game. The whole reason they exist is to affect the setting. Why would using a GM-granted item or ability to significantly change the setting be considered a bad thing?

It's not like the GM can't step in at any time and say "nope, doesn't work that way".

No decision is immune to revision, although an attempt to preserve continuity should be made if the GM decides to adjust how things work mid-campaign. But if an item works for an NPC and the players get their hands on it, it's totally lame if the GM just neuters it. Better to have it damaged or lost or stolen or simply turn out to be more trouble than it's worth.

--flatline

[GA]

My feeling is its always the GMs fault.

1. On a very basic level you picked these idiots to game with. The GM always controls who is in the game and always decides whether or not to run. It may be a very bad choice but its always there.

2. But two if you screwed up giving them an item that can break the game that's on you. The players are just trying to make the most out of every advantage they can get. As players that is kind of what they are supposed to do. It's up to the GM to limit that starting at who he allows in his games, what characters he allows in his games, and continuing the whole process of the game from deciding what objects to give to what enemies to kill, to if he decides to kill the characters off, to calling it quits if the game breaks.

3. You can destroy the object. You created it you can destroy it. Or it can get lost or swallowed or whatever.

[Icefalcon]

I see a lot of people blaming the GM solely. I don't think that is overly true in any case. The GM works hard to put forth story line. If he misses some small loop-hole in the creation of the item, especially if it is used in a way he didn't anticipate, it is not fully his fault. Yes, he should know his players. Yes, he has say on who he lets into the game. But, these might be players of a new group. Maybe the GM does not know them well.

After I moved clear across the country, this is what happened to me. I had not gamed in three years and finally put together a small group. I wanted things to work out but I had people that mostly played video games and MtG type card games. They were used to power-gaming or making unbeatable characters. It took me a whole year to adapt to their concepts of gaming. It took me a further year to stabalize everything with players coming and going among the group. After a time, I learned to anticipate how my players would use something I made up to put in a game.

I do not see that as the fault of myself or my players. It was just a matter of not thinking in the same way.

I will say though, that I never let players use loop-holes twice unless it is something that I see as playing smart rather than trying to exploit the rules.

[scottypotty]

It's the GM's job to run the game, whatever the undertones or theme. It's also the player's job to play their characters within the guidelines of their alignment and personalities. I would turn a "mishap" like this into a moral lesson. The trick is to do it in a way that seems natural and well planned. You can't explain what you're doing, just roll with the punches and set into motion something that will backfire. If an item is super unbalanced, an NPC long ago would have used it the same way. What happened to that guy(or gal)? Why don't they have the item anymore? Is it because the PCs took it? Then have another NPC take it from them.

The real gift of good storytelling is to make everything seem pre-planned. Let the abuse go on for several sessions, with small seemingly inconsequential events happening every other session. Eventually, drop the hammer and have it seem like the natural course of the story, the overlooked events being warning signs and foreshadowing. The PCs won't feel cheated as they didn't see what was now obviously going to happen, and everyone had fun doing it.

My games always involve several subplots and red herrings. Each player has at least one subplot themselves that has almost nothing to do with the other players or even the main goal of the current adventure or campaign. Once players have characters that are immersed in a game and emotionally invested, it becomes hard to make rash decisions without comtemplating consequences.

Bottom line is that it is not a negative or game-breaking problem. Anything and everything can be woven into the larger tapestry of the story you create with your players. Even "powergamers" are there for the adventure and the story. Otherwise, thay would just go play a video game and get the same enjoyment.

[The Dark Elf]

#1 the GM failed to anticipate. This is not blameworthy. It is a mere oversight. Happens twice nightly.

#2 the players exploit the situation. This is clever. Kudos players.

#3 The GM should now explain the oversight to the players and come up with with some reasoning AS A GROUP. The players may want to continue with the exploit. At this point the GM should review the exploit and his adventure outline and see if he can adapt. If you cant then you may want to explain that you are struggling to come up with a viable (and entertaining) plot/adventure and see what direction the group wants.

Ofc, specific scenario would be useful.

Btw, the post seems like a GM question to me.

[drewkitty ~..~]

#1 the GM failed to anticipate. This is not blameworthy. It is a mere oversight. Happens twice nightly.

#2 the players exploit the situation. This is clever. Kudos players.

#3 The GM should now explain the oversight to the players and come up with with some reasoning AS A GROUP. The players may want to continue with the exploit. At this point the GM should review the exploit and his adventure outline and see if he can adapt. If you cant then you may want to explain that you are struggling to come up with a viable (and entertaining) plot/adventure and see what direction the group wants.

Ofc, specific scenario would be useful.

Btw, the post seems like a GM question to me.

#1: Or the writer failed to give detailed description, thus the vaigness can be twisted this way and that.( this happens way Too Much with PB writers already. )
#2: that the players are actually "thinking" instead of being sheep should be applauded. (is not in any way saying that the GM should not get the item stollen asap.)
#3 The GM should make a ruling, with input from the players if possible, about these items to make them playable. (Or the above idea, or it breaks, runs out of power, draws in a great evil that uses up the power of the item or the item somehow needs to be sacrificed to defeat the evil.)

[Giant2005]

If I found some kind of exploit that would get me ahead in real life without any consequences, I'd use that exploit until it ran dry.
If my character had a similar opportunity, he should do the same thing - from a roleplaying perspective it would be hard justifying ignoring that opportunity.

[Noon]

i've seen alot of Shadowrun gms kick out / ban characters that would make a run easy just because they were adequate for the mission. Not that they were overtly munchkin, Just made precisely to make X mission easy.

(for example, a Healer shaman in an Arena battle scenario, or a Guy with a Truck or Anti barrier weapons in a smash and grab scenario).

How do they make characters who fit the mission? Are they told the mission before character generation?

Also, it depends: If you have players who, if the session goes easily, wont respect the game session and wont think much of it, then it's not just the GM being the problem.

[Noon]

Well, as I say, if the players don't respect the game as a sort of crafted event because it was easy, then I think the GM's being a problem if he's not saying that. It's not like it's a computer game where you don't have to respect the game (only pay for it).

[scottypotty]

If I found some kind of exploit that would get me ahead in real life without any consequences, I'd use that exploit until it ran dry.
If my character had a similar opportunity, he should do the same thing - from a roleplaying perspective it would be hard justifying ignoring that opportunity.

This should be at the forefront of any GM's mind when he/she adds a unique and powerful item to their game. Simply add logical consequences. It avoids "do-overs" which makes players feel cheated, and enriches the roleplaying experience.

[Damian Magecraft]

Time to be a better GM. Limit it, upon finding out how devastating it is.

The problem there is that the moment a GM goes to put limits on the item everyone starts screaming EVIL MEAN BAD GM.

[Damian Magecraft]

Interesting query for you...
The premise-
A GM introduces an item (object, location, whatever) to the setting and the PCs discover an exploit in that item that would break the setting and then utilize it to do just that.
My question is-
Who is at fault?
The GM for failing to anticipate the exploit?
Or
The players for utilizing the exploit?

Okay, so the issue isn't who is at fault, but rather, who used the exploit...

The exploit is used and the setting breaks. As the GM controls the setting, the GM is responsible for fixing the setting.

If GM fails to fix the setting or PCs are deliberately attempting to break the setting, then the entire group is at fault. Blaming one party without blaming the other is going to be fruitless, as you are all playing the same game. If the game is broken, you are not playing... Perhaps it's time to start over.
-Pax

and that is my point both are to blame...
but the moment the GM makes a move to "correct" the break in the game he is accused of being a bad GM.

[flatline]

Time to be a better GM. Limit it, upon finding out how devastating it is.

The problem there is that the moment a GM goes to put limits on the item everyone starts screaming EVIL MEAN BAD GM.

The GM giveth, the GM taketh away.

That is the way of things.

--flatline

[Damian Magecraft]

#1 the GM failed to anticipate. This is not blameworthy. It is a mere oversight. Happens twice nightly.

#2 the players exploit the situation. This is clever. Kudos players.

#3 The GM should now explain the oversight to the players and come up with with some reasoning AS A GROUP. The players may want to continue with the exploit. At this point the GM should review the exploit and his adventure outline and see if he can adapt. If you cant then you may want to explain that you are struggling to come up with a viable (and entertaining) plot/adventure and see what direction the group wants.

Ofc, specific scenario would be useful.

Btw, the post seems like a GM question to me.

actually the question came to me when in the course of another conversation where I suggested the GM make a few adjustments to correct a break in his game.
The response to this was an accusation of being an evil and vindictive GM who has to punish the players for his own error.

[Colt47]

Well, it comes to this: Finding an exploit is alright. Abusing the exploit for ones own gain is not. This kind of situation happens a lot in MMOs like World of Warcraft when a new patch comes out and the same kind of logic that applies there applies to the table top. So the players in your scenario are the ones at fault, not the GM.

[The Dark Elf]

#1 the GM failed to anticipate. This is not blameworthy. It is a mere oversight. Happens twice nightly.

#2 the players exploit the situation. This is clever. Kudos players.

#3 The GM should now explain the oversight to the players and come up with with some reasoning AS A GROUP. The players may want to continue with the exploit. At this point the GM should review the exploit and his adventure outline and see if he can adapt. If you cant then you may want to explain that you are struggling to come up with a viable (and entertaining) plot/adventure and see what direction the group wants.

Ofc, specific scenario would be useful.

Btw, the post seems like a GM question to me.

actually the question came to me when in the course of another conversation where I suggested the GM make a few adjustments to correct a break in his game.
The response to this was an accusation of being an evil and vindictive GM who has to punish the players for his own error.

I have made a lot of mistakes in my time even using spells that "dont work like that..." and other things. At the end of the day, if you make an honest mistake but it builds up to an intense moment keep it, BUT explain that you've made an oversight and ASK the players to just run with it in this instance.

No one wins RPG's unless the majority are having fun and that includes the GM. The players should be as understanding as the GM is when players make a noobish decision. It's not about rules its about fun.

[Tyberius]

3) In our current campaign (PF-zombies!) the Players totally nerfed my Zombie-Siege of their village by setting a bunch of bear traps and trapping the Zombies. I had a big battle planned and some damn traps nuked it! I introduced the traps to the fray by making the village a fur-trading post. Technically, they are game breaking as now the PCs will carry some everywhere they go. When they run into zombies they'll just drop the traps and play whack-a-zombie. This has sort of broken the game, who's fault is it? I think it was smart play and no one's "fault". If I was a jerk I could have figured out some idiotic way that the zombies wouldn't get trapped, but instead I took the high-road and rewarded the smart play of the players. Yes, the GMs job will be harder now, but a challenge is not a bad thing!

Now, back on topic, it's all in how you handle it. Even game breaking stuff has it's place. Sometimes it's nice to flaunt raw power, but as a norm it gets pretty boring, pretty quick.

You could have had some actual bears come in, maybe add in some bunnies and squirrels before the zombie invasion, and lessen then impact of the bear traps. But, hey that was a great idea by the players! The bear traps dont have to be 100% effective either, it would be funny if after the first wave of zombies, there would be a few with traps around their legs, dragging all sorts of debris and crud as they shambled up to the group.

[The Dark Elf]

3) In our current campaign (PF-zombies!) the Players totally nerfed my Zombie-Siege of their village by setting a bunch of bear traps and trapping the Zombies. I had a big battle planned and some damn traps nuked it! I introduced the traps to the fray by making the village a fur-trading post. Technically, they are game breaking as now the PCs will carry some everywhere they go. When they run into zombies they'll just drop the traps and play whack-a-zombie. This has sort of broken the game, who's fault is it? I think it was smart play and no one's "fault". If I was a jerk I could have figured out some idiotic way that the zombies wouldn't get trapped, but instead I took the high-road and rewarded the smart play of the players. Yes, the GMs job will be harder now, but a challenge is not a bad thing!

Now, back on topic, it's all in how you handle it. Even game breaking stuff has it's place. Sometimes it's nice to flaunt raw power, but as a norm it gets pretty boring, pretty quick.

You could have had some actual bears come in, maybe add in some bunnies and squirrels before the zombie invasion, and lessen then impact of the bear traps. But, hey that was a great idea by the players! The bear traps dont have to be 100% effective either, it would be funny if after the first wave of zombies, there would be a few with traps around their legs, dragging all sorts of debris and crud as they shambled up to the group.

That is great gameplay by the players and you were so right to let them have their moment. There is only so many bear traps one can carry and your planned fight will happen one day Im sure.

[Nekira Sudacne]

I'm not sure a psi-ghost could steal a warhead as easy as all that. Do remember that particle beams are electric attacks (seriously, it says they're electricially charged particles right in the discription) and thus deal damage to incorporal psi-ghosts.